An Investigation Into Aristotelian Functionalism

In this paper, I will examine the principal merits and challenges of René Descartes’ concept of dualism and then defend my preferred alternative among the options Paul M. Churchland discusses. After briefly defining Cartesian Dualism, I will show that its principal merits are that it is consistent with common sense and that it is able to explain phenomena that appear mental in nature. Next, I will show that its principal challenges are its failure to adequately explain how the mind and the body can causally interact, and its failure to respond to the observation that brain damage impairs the mind. Finally, I will explain why Functionalism is the best alternative to Cartesian Dualism.

Functionalism is the dogma for creating something a thought; a desire, a belief, pain, or satisfaction by allowing its dependence only on the role it plays in the cognitive system. Another classic example demonstrated through the functionalist theory, is being in a mental state of pain that induces the notion that something is wrong with one’s body, where the individual wishes to be out of its mental state and as a result, possible behavioral outputs may include wincing, moaning, crying, or anxiety. In the functionalist theory, it states that any creature that is capable of a mental state and meets its conditions experiences pain (Levin). Humans have a process of neural activity, for instance C-fiber stimulation, which meets the conditions of functionalism. Therefore, humans can experience pain by C-fiber stimulation. The theory also allows other creatures with different physical makeups that have mental states can also experience pain. Functionalist became aware that creatures with different types of physical states could experience pain.

Throughout this Book 1, the discussion digresses multiple times to explore the method by which the topic will be examined. Realising that concepts such as happiness are subjective, he establishes in the third Chapter that the fruits of the discussion will be satisfactory so long as it holds true universally. He also considers in Chapter four whether the discussion should originate from the principles, or from our experiences, and suggests that we should being from things known and immediate to us, which seems to be a logical choice as the discussions as a whole focus on what a man should do in order to act according to virtue in order to become good and attain happiness. In addition, the sixth Chapter is devoted to criticism of the theory of Forms. Since good can exist in so many different ways, but are undoubtedly good, Aristotle argues that there is no common idea governing it. He also denies the existence of separate Forms that are merely mimicked by what we perceive, since a thing and the Thing Itself has the same

In this paper, I will argue that Aristotle view of the 4 kinds of people are accurate. These 4 kinds of people are the virtuous, strong-willed, vicious, and weak-willed. First, I will set out Aristotle’s argument about a strong-willed person who struggles to overcome desires, and does it make them morally wrong. Next, I will show the 4 kinds of persons that Aristotle believes exist, they are the virtuous, strong-willed, weak-willed, and the vicious persons and his arguments concerning them. Finally, I will set out my own position to support Aristotle’s view.

This leads to the idea of functionalism, which we see is used to make sense of how our mental life can be explained as an entirely physical phenomenon. Under functionalism, the mental states we have are identical to functional states, which is what makes something a belief, desire, experience, etc. Unlike dualism, which explains that there is a difference in kind between the mind, which is immaterial, and the body, which is material, functionalism maintains that to talk about mental states is just to talk about ways that physical systems function. With this idea, functionalism is a form of

Aristotle’s theories seem to be useful but might be more morally demanding and more critical.

Aristotle’s ‘function argument’ produced in the Nicomachean Ethics, is subject to harsh criticize that seemingly attacks Aristotle as a philosopher whom does not think his works thoroughly enough. The lack of blunt argument-statehood is substantial enough to and unfortunately interferes in proceeding to understanding what Aristotle has set out to demonstrate in the Nicomachean Ethics. Book 1 is merely an introduction to Eudaimonia and the Human Function. It is but a sketch, or rather an outline to what the book informs throughout. Where many believe to be the start of the Function Argument (NE1.7, 1097b30-34), Aristotle produces imagery of human-related objectives to their appropriate functions;craftsman to man and body parts to whole. This is meant to provoke the reader to critically think about their own function--as a human and Eudaimonia (note that we learn about Eudaimonia before the function argument is presented). I will defend the function argument and it’s plausibility in this essay by explaining the method utilized to build up this strong structured argument. This essay will converse with excerpts directly from Aristotle’s work, as well as

Political advertisements play an integral part in the Presidential election. Most notably are the derogatory bashings of the opposing candidates character and policies. Each candidate has its own campaign committee to aid in the promotion of the incoming elected official. Sometimes a third party chooses to engage the opposing party of their agenda using rhetorical strategies along with numerous examples of Ethos, Pathos, and Logos. On July 13, 2012, The Emergency Committee for Israel was one of these third parties who attacked the sitting President Barrack Obama in siding with the Republican Candidate Mitt Romney in the advertisement “Time to Act.”

Aristotelian thought had been carried through the twelfth and fifteenth centuries and is regarded as the “most remarkable movements of European intellectual history” (Craig 11). The great originality and realism that Aristotle engineered provoked articulation and provided momentum for expanded thought and thinkers alike. Aristotle created a highly adaptable and able lifestyle that demanded more of humanity itself, “[These] needs were not just religious but also medical, and, perhaps most important,

The basic proposal of the functionalists is that mental states are reducible to the functional operations of the brain. According to functionalists, mental states in the brain are identified by what they do rather than by what they are made of. The main arguments for functionalism depend on showing that it is superior to its primary competitors which are identity theory and behaviorism. Those who have went against the argument in favor of the position has said that the thesis had asked the wrong questions when analyzing the brain for its capacity to explain mental states. The thesis asked what does it consist of, but the arguments against it said it should have asked what does it do instead. What roles that are played in the mind cant be reduces unless they stop working. So having a mental state of mind means that everything inside the human brain isn't working. It says as well as getting rest in the body, is necessary for getting at the essence of mind. We cant focus on the roles that are being played continuously in our brain because it is nothing special about the particular form that these take in human beings. I feel like every hypothesis of functionalism is wrong because we all know of course that our brain functions in one way, but on different

Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics, aims to explain the necessary to achieve the highest-state of human happiness. A significant argument Aristotle proposes is the function argument, which aims to demonstrate that humans have a unique function that differs from all other living beings. In effect, this essay aims to explain Aristotle’s function argument, give a critique of his conclusion, then offer a possible Aristotelian response.

Functionalism rejects the mental state of substance dualism. It is stated that the view of a functionalist is “the mind is nothing other than an elaborate program of sorts, which is the product of a spectacularly complicated pattern embodied in the physical workings of the brain.” (pg 351). It explains how the brain’s frame of mind is better understood as what it can do versus what it is composed of. Functionalism is what makes something a belief, desire, or a sensation on its purpose or part it

Aristotle has formulated an economical and clear argument, but the passage that contains it fails to connect all the premises to other parts of the text to lend them supporting arguments. Aristotle extended his approach of starting from what is commonly believed to even this human function argument which is crucial to the whole work. As a result, many readers may be left unconvinced.

The Mind-Body problem arises to Philosophy when we wonder what is the relationship between the mental states, like beliefs and thoughts, and the physical states, like water, human bodies and tables. For the purpose of this paper I will consider physical states as human bodies because we are thinking beings, while the other material things have no mental processes. The question whether mind and body are the same thing, somehow related, or two distinct things not related, has been asked throughout the history of Philosophy, so some philosophers tried to elaborate arrangements and arguments about it, in order to solve the problem and give a satisfactory answer to the question. This paper will argue that the Mind-Body Dualism, a view in

In Aristotle’s life time he transformed the human knowledge that we have now. Giving it all new meanings and purpose. During his teaching years there were over two hundred of his works in which only 31 still remain. In these writings of is lectures and notes included the things that in today’s society we reference to in textbooks and the definitions and of what his teachings were, such as; nature, mathematics, ethics, biology and art. Those few teachings, the philosophy of nature regarded to motion and functions having purpose. He covers the grounds of geometry and other elements of arithmetic Also, ethics, what’s rational, irrational, and finding happiness in your life. Aristotle being the father of zoology, his contribution to natural history and the study of life. And lastly, art, showing us the imitation of life through Aristotle’s eyes. He gave us the starting ground of the information we have now. What we know now is because of what he started before us many years ago.